Autorenprofil
With the dust settling from COP29’s hard-fought negotiations on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG), attention is shifting to how the climate finance goal will be met. The challenge is how to scale up financing for increasingly connected priorities in a challenging landscape of debt stress and cuts in official development assistance.
The recent Financing for Development (FfD4) conference in Seville offers important clues about how to continue the political momentum on the road to COP30 in Belém. It is the first time that the FfD process has meaningfully connected to relevant UNFCCC decisions. FfD4’s outcome document, the Seville Commitment, goes beyond the previous FfD outcome (the Addis Ababa Action Agenda) to meaningfully integrate climate finance within the broader development finance framework rather than treating it as a separate track.
Here are the five things that FfD4 achieved for climate finance:
The Seville Commitment features several connections to the multilateral processes for climate, biodiversity and desertification. More specifically for climate finance, it calls for ‚the provision and mobilisation of means of implementation in line with the objectives and respective commitments under the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement’. This includes the contentious NCQG decision.
This language matters. By setting the climate finance goal within the broader financing for development framework, the Commitment signals recognition that providing and mobilising financial resources to at least $300 billion by 2035 – and the scaling up to $1.3 trillion from all sources – will be linked to the discussions on international financial architecture reform.
The outcome document also calls for ‘support for the implementation of nationally determined contributions and national adaptation plans.’ Countries’ updated nationally determined contributions (NDCs), or NDCs 3.0, are due this year, and are expected to be more ambitious than the previous round, as prescribed in the Paris Agreement’s ratchet mechanism. The UNFCCC’s Standing Committee on Finance has previously estimated that developing countries’ needs in NDCs amount to US$455–584 billion per year by 2030. With NDCs 3.0 rolling in, it is possible that the estimated costs will be higher. There is a well-documented gap especially for adaptation finance needs, estimated at US$187-359 each year, which informed the Doubling of Adaptation Finance pledge made at COP21 that will expire this year.
In pursuit of the ‘scaling up’ to $1.3 trillion, the COP29 and COP30 Presidencies are developing the Baku to Belém Roadmap. As Brazil’s COP30 Presidency has outlined to its Circle of Finance Ministers, five priority areas will shape the report expected by COP30 in Belém: MDB reform, expanding concessional finance and climate funds, country platforms to boost domestic capacity, innovative financial instruments for private capital mobilisation and strengthening regulatory frameworks.
Some of these key issues include whether public finance should de-risk and mobilise private investment or provide grants and concessional funding for climate actions with public good features or uncertain returns, such as adaptation. Navigating fiscal constraints will be critical to scaling up climate finance.
The Seville Commitment’s emphasis on transparency in climate finance reporting echoes the transparency arrangements featured in the NCQG decision. Starting in 2028, countries will produce biennial reports on collective progress, including specific reporting on enhancing access, the regional balance of climate finance and the impacts, results and outcomes of climate finance flows. The outcome document’s emphasis on transparency signals continued momentum to track both the quantity and quality of finance flows.
However, progress on this front will depend on what information can be collected for reporting on a wide range of sources of finance. The broad formulation of the scaling up to $1.3 trillion in the NCQG from ‘all public and private sources’ raises a relevant question of how ‘all’ private finance flows might be counted. Capturing private finance flows remains challenging, especially regarding confidentiality and ensuring information is consistent, standardised (e.g. units and timeframes), and suitable for aggregation and assessment.
By acknowledging wider challenges – from high costs of capital to unsustainable debt levels – the Seville Commitment reflects a growing political awareness of the structural reforms needed to respond to the climate and biodiversity emergencies. How to get to the trillions needed will require coordination at several levels.
Estimates must go beyond abstract investment needs and incorporate cost of capital considerations, ultimately moving towards detailed investment plans and sophisticated financing strategies to match different sources and instruments. These should be designed in ways that minimise costs and acknowledge respective constraints for both public and private actors.
Success of the Sevilla Commitment requires policy frameworks that send clear, reliable signals to financial market participants. Countries can design policy packages tailored to their specific needs and priorities, drawing from tools across fiscal policy, financial regulation and both monetary and non-monetary measures. By taking into account a joined-up perspective of their financing needs, national policies and sustainable development objectives, countries can reduce uncertainty for investors and strengthen efforts to attract and deploy sustainable finance.
Just four months remain until the next COP. The road to COP30 and the delivery of the ‘Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T’ will depend on whether the recognition of climate in the broader development framework leads to enhanced coordination or adds another layer of complexity to an already challenging landscape.
Elizabeth Tan
Senior Research Officer in the Climate and Sustainability programme at ODI, focusing on land use, cities, and women’s economic empowerment. Her work includes developing mixed-methods surveys and researching topics such as energy transitions, urban development, and sustainable food systems
Solène Metayer
Research Fellow at I4CE, focusing on financing the ecological transition at the international level, including developing tools for tracking transition finance and integrating social aspects into green budgeting. She holds degrees from École Polytechnique and Imperial College London, and has previous experience researching the financing of power generation projects.
Angela Picciarello
Senior researcher at IISD’s Energy Program, focusing on fossil fuel policy, net-zero finance, and the energy transition. With experience at Ofgem, Oxfam GB, and ODI, she brings deep expertise in climate, inequality, and public finance.
Sébastien Postic
Research Fellow at I4CE specialising in public finance, taxation, and climate policy. With a PhD on South American energy planning, his work explores how public spending can support both climate goals and poverty reduction.
Frankfurt School gGmbH
Adickesallee 32-34
60322 Frankfurt am Main
